Add Value (Mark Carter)

Add Value Discover your VALUES find your WORTH gain FULFILLMENT in your PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL LIFE Mark Carter

First published in 2020 by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 42 McDougall St, Milton Qld 4064 Office also in Melbourne Typeset in FreightTextProMedium-Regular 11/14 pt by Aptara, India © John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2020 The moral rights of the author have been asserted ISBN: 978-0-730-38402-1 All rights reserved. Except as permitted under the Australian Copyright Act 1968 (for example, a fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review), no part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, communicated or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written permission. All inquiries should be made to the publisher at the address above. Cover design by Wiley Cover image © Fokin Ihor/Shutterstock Internal illustrations: Angela Stefanoff of Goldi Design and Monika Obrist of Refresh Design Disclaimer The material in this publication is of the nature of general comment only, and does not represent professional advice. It is not intended to provide specific guidance for particular circumstances and it should not be relied on as the basis for any decision to take action or not take action on any matter which it covers. Readers should obtain professional advice where appropriate, before making any such decision. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the author and publisher disclaim all responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any person taking or not taking action based on the information in this publication.

CONTENTS Cover About the author Foreword Acknowledgements Introduction So what is ‘value'? Human behaviour It's elemental The Value Model 1: Personal value 1. Preference: how we function 2. Motivation: finding your why 3. Intelligence — IQ & EQ: your ability to do 4. Everything else: who am I? Personal value 2: Tangible value 1. A history of money 2. Percentages 3. Numbers 4. Time Tangible value 3: Emotional value 1. The power of storytelling 2. Sensory experience 3. Personalisation: the ‘wow' factor 4. Leaps in creative faith: innovation

Emotional value 4: Service value 1. Problem–Solution 2. Possibilities–Consequences 3. Self–Others 4. The environment: to wreck or nurture? Service value 5: Relationship value 1. Authenticity: an original you 2. Candour: the biggest dirty little secret 3. Kindness: random and conscious acts 4. Love: the meaning of life Relationship value 6: Tying it all together Value disruption Angels and demons Tattoo ‘adding value' into your ethos Epilogue: Aristotle to Audrey A definition of value The Add Value nursery rhyme References Index End User License Agreement List of Table Chapter 1 Table 1.1: Potential strengths and cautions of tendencies

About the author Mark has over 20 years' experience as a learning and development professional, globally. As a former tour leader and training manager with Contiki Holidays he brings a unique perspective of depth and personal stories to conversations around behavioural sciences, business, value and growth, both personally and professionally. Mark is an international keynote speaker, trainer and coach. He is the founder of a learning management system for individuals and SMEs. He's a regular contributor to mainstream media including RendezView, News.com, 2SM/2HD, Studio 10 and GQ Australia in addition to leading business and industry publications like REB, Elite Agent and Travel Bulletin. He is accredited in a variety of recognised leading behavioural profile tools. In addition to authoring his first book Ignite Your Potential, Mark shared an initial overview of his Value Model in his TEDxCasey talk, ‘Paws and Effect: How teddy bears increase value perception'. Born in England, fermented in Scotland, nurtured by Europe and matured through several round-world trips, Mark Carter is a truly global citizen. He now calls Australia (Melbourne) home, where he enjoys the fruits of a sunny lifestyle. Mangoes, after all, don't grow in Edinburgh.

Foreword We live in an era of hashtag wisdom. Where once we would turn to our elders for guidance and inspiration, we now put influencers on a pedestal, allowing them to dust off and churn out tired old clichés and motivational one-liners that attempt to capture the complexities of life into hashtag-sized snacks for the masses. Warning: If this is what you are looking for, it may be a good time to put this book down and log onto Facebook. Feeling challenged? #nevergiveup Feeling nostalgic? #tbt Feeling grateful? #blessed Need attention? #humblebrag The problem with these cute little catchphrases is that they inevitably fall short of offering any true insight or universal truth. They simply become shortcuts to superficial expression and worse still, have the potential to feed your delusions about life and actually hide the truth from you. Buddhism suggests the path to enlightenment as being able to journey deep within yourself to shatter false beliefs and behavioural habits. The more we attempt to succinctly define truth with any amount of brevity, the further we move from our ability to understand its true meaning. This is why so many people struggle to establish a true connection with others: they lack the narrative to articulate emotions through words. In his book The Prophet, Kahlil Gibran wrote: Your hearts know in silence the secrets of the days and the nights. But your ears thirst for the sound of your heart's knowledge. You would know in words that which you have always known in thought. You would touch with your fingers the naked body of your dreams. In this beautifully crafted prose, Gibran suggests that we are all inherently born with self-knowledge. We just need to tap into its truth. And this understanding of self has never been more relevant than now, as we find ourselves on the verge of a new era in artificial intelligence. Very quickly,

machines are starting to replace the need for us to complete mundane tasks, but they can never replace the emotional aptitude required for us to live a fulfilled life. Industry 4.0 will inevitably increase the importance and need for self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy and social skills. I first met Mark during the curation process for TEDxCasey. While I was initially enamoured by his contagious enthusiasm and high-octane presence, I soon discovered that it was his understanding of people and his unique style of contextual storytelling that truly allowed him to engage with others to awaken and expand consciousness. A modern day shaman, if you will. In this book, Mark takes storytelling to a new level by deep diving into the world of ‘value' using concepts from some of our greatest thought leaders and lessons from his own unique journey. I would encourage you to find your own little corner of the universe and create an environment that will allow you to read, absorb and find your own meaning. This book is the deep dive we all need to go beyond the superficial presented to us in our daily lives. In the end, your journey must be defined on your own terms. Use this book as a compass for your own path and create a world that is truly yours. #happyreading  Chris Hall Entrepreneur and startup guru

Acknowledgements Thanks to all at TEDxCasey and friends who turned up to support the event. To Viki, Mama Bear, for connecting Lucy; in turn Chris, Sandra and all at Wiley who supported the completion of this book. TTI Success Insights: among my preferred instruments of choice when consulting behavioural sciences. Contiki colleagues and clients: some of my longest standing friends and allies. Ten years in the laboratory of 13-metre-long tour coaches turns out among the best petri dish experiments for insights into human behaviour! Not to mention the rich tapestry of history, culture and traditions one is exposed to. Thanks Chris for the foreword and collaborations past, present and future. Carter-Hall podcasts are going to be fun Hawkman! For my immediate family: Nick and Judy, John and Nova, Dad, Connor, Ross, Paul and Sally, and Frances. Regardless the distance, space or time you remain in my own Dunbar's number! Thanks too, Mum (going above and beyond motherly duties, turning four decades' experience as a librarian into a role as informal editor!). To my agents (all at ICMI), clients, collaborators, friends and supporters: there are far too many kind souls, including you as a reader, who support my work. I look forward to our paths crossing at a live event. As an eager cross-legged listener, if you hear or see the author in the storytelling speaker, we've done well. As a special thanks, you can unlock secret content in my academy. Complimentary registration and login buttons are on my website www.markcarter.com.au Bespoke Code: ADDVALUE I'd also like to pay homage to all traditional custodians of Australia. The day I landed here, in 2002, after being a nomad for so many years, I had a strong sense that Australia was to be my home base. Whilst it took 3 months tracking down all necessary paperwork, I was granted my initial

residence visa (temporary) within 10 days of lodging the application. I feel privileged to be adopted by a country with, likely, the oldest continual culture. An aboriginal philosophy on knowledge and learning says ‘the more you know the less you need.' In a world frequently driven by materialism and consumption this is a sound reminder. You are your greatest tool of value. It's perhaps serendipitous, strange or fortunate, that timing means as we send this book to print we are feeling the impact globally of COVID19, coronavirus. With it comes generosity and selflessness along with their counterparts, opportunism and selfishness. Fear is the energy that contracts. Love is the energy that expands. Even amid the experience of short periods of social distancing we can use the opportunity to be more connected. Every life event is an opportunity to choose love . . . and add value.

Introduction ‘Define value for me.' I first asked this question almost two decades ago. I was coaching Chris, who had been successful in business. As a manager he was struggling with coaching and leading a team of others to achieve similar results. He paused before answering, slightly puzzled. ‘I've never really thought about it.' This struck me as curious for two reasons. The first is he clearly knew how to build or demonstrate value (in a client's sense anyway) given his prior results. The second struck me as somewhat stranger. Surely the concept of value (in business) is an important synergy: like the engine to a car. Without one you're left with an empty decorative shell. After more serious pause and thought, Chris added with uncertainty, ‘It's what people are willing to pay for. Isn't it?' I continued to search with further open-ended probing. ‘Is it? Is that all of it? What else is there? What else might others consider?' No matter how versatile his offerings, Chris still felt a comprehensive, succinct view of value remained elusive despite the running tally of valid piecemeal definitions building up like a smorgasbord. Not because I'd told him any of his answers were right or wrong. They all had merit. Chris, like virtually everyone else I've asked since, intuitively knew there's more to ‘value'. They just can't quite put their finger on it. So what is ‘value'? In business, value is commonly accepted as a crucial component of the customer equation. We've even given it a label: value proposition. If you don't provide value, there's no reason you'll land or keep a client.

That's partially why Chris's initial answer leaped straight to the idea of ‘what someone is willing to pay for something'. It's a very narrow, bottomline-minded viewpoint. Not all decisions are based on return on investment, or ‘show me the money!' That's part of the reason I've discovered people have to dig deeper to consider what value really means to them. Value has become so linked to commercial metrics and measures of success that we frequently miss what may prove to be an even greater treasure, even for those corporate clients with shareholders to please and profit-and-loss sheets to reconcile. You've no doubt heard the mantra ‘adding value', whether it be in relation to adding real value in business or sustaining quality relationships in our personal lives. We all look at our world differently, so to assume value and quality are perceived by others the same way we perceive them can limit our ability to truly connect with others. In business, it can limit our ability to effectively communicate and connect with clients or collaborators. If you inspect value more closely, what also becomes crystal clear is that it underpins an important place in every part of our lives: personal bonds, an ability to influence communities or even legacies we may leave behind. Value permeates every nook and cranny in life. If a human being were a land mass, then value would be a combination of the existing wells that rise within, or the ocean that surrounds and continually massages it in tides, serving to nourish and enrich its potential. This is why I found it all the more curious that during an extensive, continued quest it was surprisingly rare to find anyone with absolute clarity or conviction of the total meaning of value. It was far more common to find ambiguity and sometimes confusion in responses — ‘I've never really thought about it' and ‘Ummm …' being two of the more typical. In those early days I also turned to many gospels of knowledge as a part of my inquisitiveness including white papers, opinion pieces and the Oxford English Dictionary. Even this greatest testament of tuition, established for the sole purpose of clarity in definition, yields a variety of subjective short answers, some similar to those offered by respondents. All of which leads to the somewhat accurate conclusion that the regard that something is held to deserve — its importance, its worth or usefulness, its

value — is linked to perception. Individuals have a tendency to perceive and assume value through specific, often favoured, filters. The risk with this preferential default approach means we may alienate, or not as easily align with, others. A further inability to pick up on subtle clues when approaching situations habitually means we may completely miss the value mark. Which beckons the questions: What are any of those perceptions based on? What's the difference between my own and others' impressions? What motivates my choices or notions of value? And perhaps the most powerful question (for your professional or personal life): What motivates the sensation in others? Human behaviour Values are an integral part of addressing human behaviour because a person's thoughts translated into actions are a direct representation — a strong statement — of what they believe in and prioritise. Human behaviour has been studied for many centuries: from Hippocrates, who developed a theory that moods, emotions and behaviour had an impact on the essential bodily fluids; to Leonardo da Vinci, who expanded previous personality models to incorporate layers that many people would consider pseudoscience (herbalism, astrology and the like); to the modern-day Myers– Briggs Type Indicator® personality test, which makes the theory of Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung's eight profile types comprehensible and useful in people's lives. Essentially, Jung's theory was that seemingly random behaviour can be a result of basic differences in the way people use their perception and judgement. It's elemental

In the 5th century BCE, the philosopher Empedocles proposed the classical theory that there are four fundamental elements present in all matter. We know these classical elements as earth, air, fire and water. In modern times they may also be referenced respectively as solids, gas, plasma and liquids. A century later, the Ancient Greek alchemist of philosophy, Aristotle (384– 322 BCE), surmised all things were a combination of both matter and form and theorised a correlation between potentiality and actuality. Aristotle's burning log Aristotle burned a log to show how the four classical elements coexist within all matter to differing proportions: earth/solids are the charcoal and ash as they fall air/gas is released through smoke, rising quickly fire/plasma are the flames rising quickly water/liquid bubbles out and also falls. Experimenting with these elements, Aristotle also differentiated a fifth element, one that allowed for perfection or movements of more otherworldly, divine objects such as the heavens, planets and stars. This elusive element later became known as ‘aether'. In a separate yet related concept, Aristotle proposed a story for causality — the why of something. The simple way to look at it is that everything made from any or all of the classical elements may take its ultimate form through an active journey of four causes, or layers. Together these four layers answer the why of something. The Value Model Aristotle's model is a beautiful, simple framework with which to package the philosophy of value. So it made sense to me that I should leverage some of Aristotle's inspiration when structuring a philosophical model on how to

add, create and appreciate value — all with the aim of helping people be authentic and connect with others. If you were to ask hundreds of people to define ‘value' you'd get hundreds of different answers. I know, because I've done it. However, within these definitions are core patterns with which to neatly package a more digestible explanation that can be leveraged with powerful purpose. The value model I introduce and explore in this book is designed to prepare you to manage the challenges of today and tomorrow — both business and personal — by tapping into a complete sense of your values. Just as Aristotle's five elements each have four causes, the five values that make up the Value Model each have four layers that underpin them. These five values — personal, tangible, emotional, service and relationship (more on these shortly) — are the subject matter of chapters 1 to 5 of this book (the ‘value' chapters). As with Aristotelian deductive reasoning, none of the Value Model's five values satisfactorily lives in isolation. We may all have strong preferences towards certain values and behaviours, yet they all coexist to varying degrees within everyone's individual perception. Our inclinations vary depending on situational considerations — personal and professional life being obvious ones. The priority or importance given to something is another. Plus, our underlying values, or value system, play a critical part. It's my hope that reading this book will help you remove any biases or habitual filters with which you may view our world in order to elevate both connection and perception of value using simple ideas such as storytelling. And these perceptions don't remain static or set in stone. Just like the motion of the all-magic aether, the continual journey and circle of life entails navigating situations and influences from external factors that may affect our preferences of value. As you devour or absorb the intricacies of the Value Model, make sure to pause and ponder where you may be firmly rooted, or consider how you might adapt. A strong stance to adopt, which I'll dive into in chapter 6, is to

embody as many, if not all, of the values by default. Your life and the lives of others will be all the richer, fuller and more rewarding for it because the ideas in each component of the Value Model, when applied with conscious awareness and effort, will improve your ability to connect with others, both personally and professionally. I've included in each ‘value' chapter some tips and ideas I call ‘selfreflEQtions' — because I've come to realise, the more I work in the field of human behaviour, that it is the soft skills and human skills associated with EQ that become ever more important. The purpose of the self-reflEQtions is to provoke initial thoughts and apply emotional intelligence for each value. You'll find additional extended ones in supporting content online at portal.markcarter.com.au (use the bespoke code ‘ADDVALUE' when setting up your free profile). Human beings are onions! It is not the purpose of this book to act as a bible for behavioural models or psychoanalysis tools. It is to paint a context of where they have come from and why they are important to perceptions of the world around us, including value. In the same way science continues to evolve, so do people and our understanding of human behaviour. Every year additional studies, research papers and generally accepted ideas are released in relation to personality, traits and behaviours. While you can't package any individual one neatly into a single box, many of these models have merit. There are dozens of commonly accepted behavioural profiling tools. The more you're exposed to, the easier it is to see glaringly obvious commonalities. They help us better understand ourselves and others. They help explain why some things may be prioritised by us or others. There are times people perceive things so differently, or their behaviour is so foreign, we're left wondering if we're really all from the same planet! So what are these tools objectively looking at or measuring? This is where an expanded awareness of neuroscience and the human brain come into play. Behavioural tools help us unravel — like the layers of an onion — different aspects of this journey and existence we call being human: the manner with which we gather or take in information and perceive our environment; how we then compute, analyse or make sense of that data; the method by which we come to conclusions or decisions; and

the manner in which we communicate, relate and deal with our external world. Among these layers (which are also referred to as causes, dichotomies, traits and metrics in chapters 1 to 5) we can rip into the fabrics that weave our perceptions of value, values and self-worth. The five values The Value Model is designed to provide context and practical, bite-sized understandings that will inspire you to discover possibilities in approaching your world differently. As I briefly touched on, the five overarching values are: 1. Relationship value: Quality relationships with others is a significant aspect of our life. No-one is designed to be an island. Relationships that, like fire, offer warmth are the ones we treasure most. 2. Service value: We also have a synergy with others in giving and receiving service. Being of service to others is an airborne elixir that allows the world to harmoniously evolve. 3. Emotional value: We're all driven by emotions. Our mental states act like an internal compass to help us make a decision. Water is a universal symbol representing our emotional states or moods. 4. Tangible value: Individuals appreciate the tangible exchange of measurable goods or services. Tangible transactions, then, are very grounded, like earth, allowing us to benchmark and measure our world. 5. Personal value: This is the special value in my Value Model. It is people — all individuals — who give meaning to the other four values and truly bring them to life. Our journey of discovering the Value Model begins with the personal value — that is, with understanding people better. In the same way that Aristotle saw the aether as being, somewhat, otherworld, there are times when we deal with others and we're left wondering: Are we really all from the same planet?

1 Personal value Identifying your how, why, do and who My deep fascination with the nature of people began while working for Contiki Holidays as a leader and Training & Development Manager across Europe. I often joke that it was the best live laboratory one could wish for! Akin, somewhat, to being inside a 13-metre-long petri dish reality experiment of human behaviour, made more fascinating by the dynamics of individuality and environment playing out. Imagine it. You have a group of 50 young adults, aged between 18 and 35, from every corner of the globe. Already you have a melting pot of cultures, people brought up with different influences (family and country two of these) as a starting point. Add to this a variety of professions, attitudes and of course what we're beginning to explore here, personality types. It's the perfect forum for observing people and mastering skills relative to human behaviour. If you're paying attention that is! All guests were encouraged to complete a feedback form at the end of their tour — in fact it was imperative. The corporate office held high expectations of consistently great feedback. If road crew received unfavourable feedback they'd be at risk of having their contract payment docked. In fact so much was the pressure that at one point there was a ‘black market' for blank feedback forms. Some tour leaders may, if they felt members of

their group had given them an unruly slating, be inclined to ‘doctor' a new version. I never saw the point in doctoring or amending those forms. I'm not perfect. I don't claim to be. I've never been. It's better to be open to learning from perceptions from others rather than run or hide. That said, I also understand why some peers might be tempted. Yet even within an environment that provided every individual the rich rewards and valuable experiences we associate with exploring cultures, some people were never happy. Then, when asked for written feedback, all they could muster up was negative, often mundane, complaints: hotel rooms were too small; music choices on long journeys were crap; or any number of fairly minor criticisms. They might also attack the decisions or behaviour of their road crew (sometimes with just cause) often times without full consideration. When you're leading groups of people, including 50 tourists, around multiple countries with so many considerations of logistics, risk, compliance and personalities, it's impossible to appease or please everyone all the time. I recall after one of my first tours several people wrote similar feedback. Something along the lines of ‘Mark's a great guy, but he shows favouritism'. When asked about it by the office, I reflected and pondered a better question. What was I doing that made some people think or feel I was showing favouritism? The answer struck me like a lightning bolt. I'm naturally an outgoing, energetic person, drawn to banter and fun. Back then, with the hindrance of youth and far less wisdom, even more so! So, doing the rounds on those longer travel days, with hours spent on the coach, I'd find myself talking longer with people like me: somewhat extroverted, a little cheeky and playful. I may not have been spending as long or been as boisterous or bold with the reserved passengers, who were naturally a little more quiet despite attempts to encourage them from their shells. In my mind, giving them a little peace was meant respectfully so as not to disturb them. They were interpreting this as preferential treatment. I subsequently learned to pre-empt this situation. I'd call it out on the first day of my tours. After learning everyone's names I'd let them know they all had access to my available time equally. All they needed to do was ask. I never had feedback about showing favouritism again.

Personal value in a nutshell Within the realm of personal value we can identify four layers: 1. Preference: how we function 2. Motivation: finding your why 3. Intelligence — IQ & EQ: your ability to do 4. Everything else: who am I? Let's discover the intricacies of each of these personal value layers so that you can leverage your strengths, identify your motivation, apply EQ with an open mindset and look for clues in others. 1. Preference: how we function My ‘aha' moment at Contiki is one simple example amid thousands concerning the dynamics of how people prefer to function. Working in that environment for years, I built my own playbook for behavioural sciences for the purpose of harmonising groups, resolving conflict, selling excursions and even problem solving some pretty significant or severe crises. Later, when undertaking multiple accreditations and qualifications, I found the courses instantly recognisable. The initial surface of personal value perception to peel back is the outer one we see and interact with — it's simply how people prefer to function. When you're attentive, you start to see clues to the mix of people's preferences. Profiling tools are not designed to put people in boxes or give them labels. And no single one explains the sophistication or complexity of individuality. What they are great for is to begin to hone in on clues. Noone lives in a single area, a single label. You may find some resonate more strongly than others or notice certain traits more clearly than others in the people around you. These help indicate some of the tendencies or preferences of how we like to function. They also have an impact on the worldly perception of value or worth.

American psychologist, lawyer and inventor William Moulton Marston published a paper in 1928 entitled ‘Emotions of normal people', in which he proposed that human behaviour was, in part, influenced by whether what the person perceived of their environment was favourable or not. He observed a strong connection between emotion and blood pressure and is credited with inventing systolic blood pressure testing, an integral component of the polygraph lie-detector tests. There have been suggestions his work was based on lessons from his wife Elizabeth. He noted that ‘when she got mad or excited, her blood pressure seemed to climb'. In his paper, Marston laid out theories and concepts that became the basis of DISC theory, which comprises a set of profiling tools that categorise people according to four personality types: Dominance produces activity in an antagonistic environment: dominant people are results driven individuals who may be perceived by others as ambitious, driving and decisive. Influence produces activity in a favourable environment: influencers are outgoing, warm, expressive individuals who have a tendency to give trust more openly. Steadiness produces passivity in a favourable environment: steady people value consistency and prefer quality over quantity. They're naturally more patient, predictable, empathetic and are good listeners. Compliance produces passivity in an antagonistic environment: compliant people appreciate the provision of procedures, constraints, rules and a standard playbook of regulations. They tend to be detailed, precise, careful and systematic. What to do with the how We have a tendency to act out and display our preferences in everything we do. Let's take something as simple as organising a picnic. Some among us (let's go high Influence preference) when planning that outing will tend to leave things to the last minute. They'd be less aware of holidays that might interfere with such plans. You're more likely to receive an invite days out or spontaneously far closer to time rather than a month in advance. They'll invite whoever springs to mind, unaware or oblivious as to

whether riffs among groups of friends might prove disruptive on the day. They'll choose a fun location and aren't really thinking about where every individual may be coming from. You'll be asked to bring food, drinks and perhaps some games. On the day they'll arrive enthusiastic, even if a little late and disorganised, for their own event. Others among us who are their friends (let's go high Compliance preference) will receive the aforementioned invitation and have an initial reaction of WTF! Or they may have a slight panic attack, a minor bout of anxiety, on behalf of their organising friend. You'll know these souls because they're the ones who kindly phone or write back with the tagline ‘Mark, thanks for the invite. I'm sure it will be fun. I've just got a few questions'. Questions along the lines of: Where exactly are we meeting in that grassy area in the park? What if it's raining? You do know that Oliver and Lisa aren't talking right now, so maybe not such a good idea to have them both there until they patch things up? By the way Mark, what should I, or anyone else bring? If we don't write a list we're likely to end up with multiple chickens and not enough salads, surely, aren't we? Oh, one last thing Mark, I know you don't have children but next time you may want to consider doing this a month or so later when the school holidays are on. This will be far easier for many of us. In a different scenario, imagine after a great week at work a decision is made to go for team drinks. Some (let's go high Dominance preference) will march straight out the door leading the way to the nearest decent bar, especially when they know happy hour is just about to start. Others from the group (let's go with high Steadiness preference) will see the aforementioned results-driven colleague/friend and holler out to them, ‘Hey, Ryan! Who died and made you commander in chief?' indicating with a circular hand motion the entire group. They'd likely then add ‘We haven't talked about it yet. We may want to go somewhere else!' They will then invite a huddle — a group discussion — ensuring input is heard from everyone. Meanwhile Ryan, now 30 metres ahead and moonwalking subtly backwards Michael Jackson style in the direction of the obvious establishment of choice, turns back to the gang. He spanks the palm of his hand on his forehead in despair while hollering a friendly, yet short and curt reply.

‘What are you on about! We're right here aren't we? We're wasting time and happy hour anywhere will be done by the time you lot finish talking about it!' We're all individuals We are who we are. It's jungle law (kind of)! Think about it like this. A lion is a lion, you see. A lion wants to roam the plains hunting wildebeest, taking long naps, not fussed by others between those mealtimes. Because that's what a lion likes to do. A lion doesn't want to swing in trees playing with monkeys or splash around in the water with baby elephants thank you very much. If you're inclined towards analytics and detail, you're going to value data. If you've a tendency to big picture or ideas, you'll value freedom to explore. If you're results driven, you'll appreciate the value of getting shit done. If you have an inclination towards harmony, conversations with others are of high worth. As accredited profiling tools — including my favourite instruments from TTI Insights Success — stipulate, these preferences are not, I repeat not: a measure or indication of skill a measure of education or training a benchmark or measure of a person's intelligence an indicator of someone's underlying values. We'll get to some of those in the other layers of personal value. A preference is simply that. One person may be drawn to view big-picture thinking with a desire to break from the rules. Yet in doing so they may be more skilled than others who know the rules well. These initial ideas help identify a practical road map for improving the value and quality of such things as communication, collaboration or minimising conflict with others. Another nuance of human behaviour is that so often we may not appreciate our own value, not realising the worth of what we bring to the table. When

we get caught in a game of comparison with others we may devalue ourselves. All individuals have unique gifts of value to share with the world, regardless of the weighting of those preferences. These predilections may lend themselves to a natural set of skills or gifts in addition to Achilles heels. Table 1.1 presents a snapshot of what I mean.

Table 1.1: Potential strengths and cautions of tendencies Strengths Cautions Dominant tendency Direct candid communication Too blunt or cold Streamlines efficiently Shoots down others' ideas Evaluates risk swiftly Won't consider all perspectives Time conscious Decisions at the expense of collaboration Systematic, organised approach Little patience for reasoning Influence tendency Inspiring, engaging communication Talks too much or over the top Blue sky thinking, creative ideas Over-promises or takes on too much Anticipates opportunities Misses crucial information required Pivots and adapts quickly Innovates at the expense of logic Lifts energy or inspires others Goes off on left field tangents Steadiness tendency Empathetic, listening, communicative Shies from difficult conversations Builds strong relationships Side-tracked in conversations Consolidates trust and satisfaction Collaborates at the expense of decisions Anticipates others' expectations Procrastinates or loses pace Compliance tendency In-depth evidenced communication Long-winded excessive information Establishes processes and systems May miss the big picture or vision Demonstrates ROI Slow to momentum or to adapt Identifies trends in the data patterns Safe logic at the expense of innovation Fulfills compliance, mitigates risks Overthinks

I'd emphasise that an inclination towards any skill doesn't guarantee being more masterful. Someone who considers their creative talents meagre, believing their strength lies in mechanics and details, may yield a harvest of fruitful innovation, even in comparison with the day-dreaming individual with a tendency towards that trait. Conversely, one who seems to think in big colourful pictures with little patience or inclination for administrative spreadsheets may find their skill for detail, when applied, equal or even greater than the person preferring solitary work in the quest for quantitative data and research. And so … As a way of wrapping up the how, or first layer, of personal value, let's simplify the four DISC personality types into two streams of practical, useable observations by way of three examples. In general conversations there are two types of people: those who listen — they don't interrupt or talk over the top of others. They tend to internalise their viewpoint to gain clarity before speaking aloud to share their answer. This can be after a short, or even somewhat longer, period of silence. For those who don't function this way, that quiet equates to feeling like a fortnight and they succumb to the temptation to fill the void with more noise! In doing so, the silent partner, who was on the verge of giving you a thoughtful answer, is now forced back to the beginning of the thinking process to ponder the new question posed, the danger then being they never really get the time or space required and cutting them off means missing their valuable inputs. those who talk — including talking over the top of others (a slightly rude habit to be mindful of!). They externalise aloud, in draft, downloading all their thoughts and viewpoints as though tipping out all the Lego bricks. The conversation, its shape shifting like sand dunes, is mined as they go, building clarity from the chatter. Some people, listening to the roving, adapting, seemingly random soliloquy may wonder ‘Do we really need to hear all of this?' The answer is yes, as it's in the speaking aloud that clarity comes. To gag the outpour is to damn their wisdom.

So which way is better? They both are equal, as each method allows the individual to digest information and share viewpoints. We can be more mindful and patient with each other. In conflict there are two types of people: those requiring time-out to mull things over — they find calm in the quiet space left by your absence and so for a period it's best to leave them be. For others, who don't operate this way, it may prove difficult to understand or identify with them. Rather, they want to keep pressing a resolution without realising the more you're in the other party's face the further away you drive them. Respect the space, acknowledge the other party requires time-out, then simply ask that they come back to you as soon as they can, knowing your own mind will likely be stuck in overthinking loops in the meantime. those who want to talk about it right now — they say, ‘we're already together, in discussion, so let's just hammer it out'. There's no need for space apart or long silences. Again, you see the contrast. For those requiring a pause this may seem exceptionally intense, without realising how much the time-out plays on the other party's mind. Perhaps again we can learn to respect the other, acknowledging you know the discussion is important, and give a promise to then come back as soon as you're ready. The key here is to follow through on the promise and not extend longer silences than necessary or just cut people off and ghost. Again, neither method is more correct or better than the other. As a final example, in general commitments and projects there are also two types of people: those who break a task down, step-by-step, into equal amounts — they will likely work at a steady pace with regular updates to follow through as promised and complete the commitment either ahead of or right on time. those whose preference would be to potentially put it on ice until the commitment becomes more pressing or urgent — the majority of activity required ramps up in the final few days with little updates

along the way. They then slide in, ahead of or on time, to hit a home run, the reason being that this self-induced pressure is where their magic happens. Which method is correct? Well, hopefully you get a sense now that they both are. Provided commitments are met to standard, and on time, does it really matter? To judge less and show greater patience and appreciation for how others prefer to function can reduce so much tension and conflict. If we make an effort in only a few adaptations, we needn't change who we are to add value to our external world. How people prefer to function is not a stand-alone indicator or explanation of perception of value, values or even self-worth. This outer layer may be accentuated or tethered when working in conjunction with the other layers of the ‘human onion'. For example, how people function doesn't automatically translate or explain why. 2. Motivation: finding your why To highlight how ingrained the second layer of our personal value is within us all, let's consider for a moment the pre-historic alpha hunter and the modern-day equivalent. (Wo)man returns to the cave empty-handed. Whereas this was once a disaster meaning hunger or angst for the tribe, it's now not so much of a strain as the spoils to tackle these days are salaries with a regular pay cheque, not the claws of rampant, angry prey. Upon entering the cave, now called a house, (wo)man dumps their weapons, these days a laptop and gym bag, in the corner. Hungry, after a long day battling a variety of beasts (these days a mixed bag of human personality types, some of them weirdos), (wo)man grunts as they swing open the Fisher & Paykel fridge door. Peering inside with mouth-watering curiosity, they begin rummaging through the leftovers — you know, foil-covered plates with the food from Sunday, Saturday or even the Thursday before this manic Monday.

Uninspired by dried remains of roast dinners or withered, hardened pasta they begin to rifle other mediocre offerings, the trophies available for endof-the-month prior to payday. There's a quarter of a carton of milk, only just out of date. The last scrapings in the Vegemite jar prove difficult to procure even with the help of a butter knife. And anyway the last of the lavosh is corners and crumbs from broken biscuits left from a prior late night snack attack of the munchies. The final straw is seeing the tomato sauce bottle top, firm like cement from the excess of prior squeezing. It's going to take more than Gordon Ramsay inspiration to pull anything edible together with this sad-looking lot. So a grunt turns to ‘f*ck it' as (wo)man decides it's time to go hunting and replenish the stock. Of course, this no longer means an existence of sitting silently alert for hours in bushes wondering where the next meal may come from. It also no longer requires the efforts of co-hunters. In fact, gathering these days as a group inevitably leads to bickering rather than a unified approach. Decision made, (wo)man heads off alone on a mission straight to the rich hunting ground known as the shops. They know this terrain so well: the exact order of aisles to walk down in order to hunt and gather basic supplies for the next couple of weeks. So they're in and out like a ninja. They return to the cave, throw out the old, and load up with the new stocks. Now they can put their feet up to enjoy some kind of unreal reality with a tray full of goodies resting on their belly as a minor feast after another successful hunt. There are three primary drivers for motivation. This, my friends, is a rudimentary summary of the first type of motivation — biological — which has barely changed in thousands of years. (We'll get to the other two — extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation — shortly.) In the days of our earliest ancestors (long before Aristotle said ‘at his best, man is the noblest of all animals, separated from law and justice he is the worst') our motivations — our why — were very simple: survive and propagate.

If you were hungry, you'd be driven to find food and eat. If you were thirsty, you'd drink. If you felt fear, you'd run away to fight another day. Biological motivation is inherent in our DNA. We find ourselves driven to follow these impulses as a natural part of survival, to reproduce and to evolve. The ‘body clock' kicks in after seeing one too many cute munchkins or reaching a certain stage of life where procreation feels almost necessary. The fight-or-flight mechanism we reach for is still hardwired in our brains, although the manner with which we leverage the response has changed. There are many people who find that motivation is fluff or pseudoscience. Thinking about our drive in relation to satiating biological desires is a great start to breaking down the different sorts of drive that exist. From biological needs to the other drivers Abraham Maslow (1908–1970) was raised in New York during a period of racism and prejudices, not only in the broader external world but also within his own home. Internally, Maslow said he didn't have the type of strong bond other progeny have with their parents: ‘Since my mother is the type that's called schizophrenogenic in literature — she's the one who makes crazy people, crazy children — I was awfully curious to find out why I didn't go insane'. Maslow ‘reacted' against her values and views. He saw his mother as selfish, unloving, self-serving, prejudiced (especially against people of colour) and with a closed mind to life, saying anyone who disagreed with her was wrong. As a professor of psychology, Maslow cultivated an interest in human health and fulfillment based on needs in a priority order. His model, released in 1943 under the title ‘A Theory of Human Motivation' became better known as ‘Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs'. As a humanistic psychologist, Maslow believed people had an inherent drive towards ‘self-actualisation', a desire, if you will, to fully realise their own potential, fulfillment, capabilities and creativities — that is, their deeper intrinsic motivation. Maslow was somewhat critical of Sigmund Freud's works. ‘It is as if Freud supplied us the sick half of psychology and we must now fill it out with the healthy half'.

Maslow's theory was illustrated in a five-stage pyramid. As individuals' most pressing needs were fulfilled, they'd give attention to the next level and so on: beginning at the bottom running to the peak of the pyramid. 1. At the base of the pyramid are our basic or physiological needs: breathing, food, water, sleep, reproduction, homeostasis, excretion. 2. The second level consists of safety needs: security, order and stability: security of body, employment, resources, morality, family, health, property. These first two steps are related to the basic physical survival — fight-orflight — of an individual. Maslow's theory stated that once the boxes for nutrition, shelter and safety have been ticked an individual becomes motivated to accomplish more. But until our base needs have been taken care of it's hard to tap into the higher levels of self-actualisation. 3. The third level is identified as love and belonging: friendship, family and sexual intimacy. Once an individual has got themselves together, taking care of business as it were, they are ready to share themselves with others. 4. The fourth level is the esteem level: self-esteem, confidence, achievement, respect of others, respect by others. These first four levels became known as ‘deficit needs', meaning if you didn't have enough in the tank you'd be left discontent and wanting. But once these deficit needs were mostly fulfilled contentment would follow. At this point individuals began to explore the need for harmony. Feeling a sense of harmony and contentment, individuals would then explore ‘selfactualisation' to reach their full potential and accomplish goals. So, order, or beauty, was the path to the fifth level. 5. The top of the pyramid is labelled the ‘need for self-actualisation': morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, acceptance of facts.

Maslow's term ‘metamotivated' — becoming everything one is capable of becoming — sums up the context of self-actualisation. Perhaps fuelled by experiences with his own mother, he observed its nature was individual — and indeed some people seem to achieve self-actualisation via a ‘healthy narcissism'. Maslow's model has come increasingly under scrutiny and fire from a ‘scientific' standpoint, primarily due to his research methods. He included arguably subjective biographical analysis and lacked somewhat the empirical evidence required. That said, we see there are some common-sense truths to the concepts and theories of personal drive. It's not as obvious to focus on others if you're living in poverty or on the breadline yourself. You're not necessarily going to feel the love if you're being bullied, rejected or disrespected by others. If you're lacking self-confidence, you may be less inclined to drive towards igniting potential. So in this sense Maslow's work is worthy of fuelling self-reflection relating to why you do things as part of the ‘science' of motivation. Extrinsic and intrinsic drivers expanded In the 1960s, social psychologist Douglas McGregor created a recognisable theory for motivation based on how managers view their people. His is the single fundamental model that really helps highlight the difference between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. He came up with two distinctly different theories to explain how their beliefs about what motivates them can affect their management style. He called these Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X This theory worked on the assumption that individuals have little ambition and that some aren't particularly goal oriented and work purely for selfinterest and essentials. McGregor contended that the management style to adopt in this situation in order to maximise efficiency and results had to be hands on. In order to motivate individuals Theory X proposed using rewards and/or punishment. These external, extrinsic drivers, regardless of whether they were good or bad, served as fuel to ignite the human spirit and potential.

Within Theory X was space for both a hard- and a soft-manner approach. We know of course the hard one as being micro-management: full on, hands on, being the watchful eye and even at times including intimidation. The caution here was that using this approach may foster hostility and negativity within an environment and risked reducing an individual's self-worth. A softer, more lenient version has more relevant validity. Some people only find their mojo when impacted by external factors. Used wisely, this axis of reward or punishment might be a path to help ignite self-motivation. There is a downside, however. Building an environment where individuals become reliant on rewards risks fostering a sense of entitlement, stretching over estimations of one's own worth or capabilities and even low outputs without benefit or remuneration. Theory Y This premise held the view that individuals were more inclined to take responsibility and accountability for all their results, thereby requiring less supervision. This internal desire, being like Maslow's highest pyramid step of selfactualisation, drives people to strive to reach their full potential or to perform at their very best, fuelled from a deeper burning fire within: an internal or intrinsic motivation. Like Maslow, McGregor believed the path to self-actualisation was more fulfilling and delivered the greater reward. His model is perhaps simpler to remember and absorb than Maslow's, but together these models are rooted in motivation theory. Those of you who read motivational books may also recognise Theory X and Theory Y packaged slightly differently in the work of Daniel Pink, author of Drive. Happiness and motivation In the 2011 documentary Happy — directed, written and co-produced by Roko Belic, who interviewed people in 14 different countries for the documentary — further context helps us differentiate intrinsic and extrinsic motivation or goals. In some ways these views lend kudos to support common-sense factors within Maslow's model.

Daniel Gilbert, PhD and author of Stumbling on Happiness, says ‘Anybody who says money can't buy happiness has never met someone who lives in a cardboard box under a bridge'. He adds, ‘But anybody who tells you money buys happiness has never met a very rich person'. In other words, anyone living in poverty has the possibility of being elevated to middle-class status with money; however, beyond that money makes little difference. Many individuals, no matter the wealth, resources or material goods they can access, learn to adapt and live within, to the full extent, the new level of means and still crave a desire for more. So in order to find happiness the delineation between external (extrinsic) and internal (intrinsic) motivation helps us find a path to being ‘happy'. A contemporary view of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Extrinsic goals include reward or praise, but also apply to the accumulation of ‘stuff', primarily: money and financial success image and looking good status and popularity. Conversely, intrinsic goals are psychological needs geared towards being more rather than having more. The primary types of fulfillment are inherently satisfying in and of themselves: personal growth to become and be who I am relationships and feeling more closely connected to others a desire to help the community and make the world a better place. Internal and external motivation are wired in opposing base value systems. There are many white papers, opinion pieces and studies in this digital age

which find that people oriented towards money, status or image report less satisfaction with their lives. They're more depressed and anxious or less vitally energised. Those oriented towards and valuing more quality relationships, self-improvement and community spirit are generally happier and less depressed or anxious. When we get to chapter 5 — Relationship value — the single finding from the longest study on human happiness hammers home this point. That's not to say that external motivation is wrong or bad. In fact, as you'll find in chapter 4 — Service value — one's capacity to contribute to the community is drastically increased with greater access to wealth and resources. This is where deeper-seated values and value systems come into play. Nevertheless, in all aspects of life, external motivation may lose its appeal, punch or shine over time. Take, for example, the ‘naughty corner'. Even for a toddler, half an hour eventually becomes easier to handle. After a few short stints, even two hours or multiple nights sent to bed without playtime become a breeze. There's also another fatal flaw: not everyone is motivated by the same external reward. A classic simple example to highlight this relates to sales. There's a common misnomer that all salespeople must be driven by money. While many might have it as part of their drive, it ain't necessarily so. Chris, the manager who sparked my thinking deeper into our Value Model, clearly was. One reason I asked him a series of questions was because while I'd been personally successful in sales for many years, even building out bespoke sales capabilities for businesses, the primary motivation wasn't about the money. Intrinsic motivation decoded German philosopher, psychologist and author of Types of Men, Eduard Spranger (1882–1963) held a view that ‘on a lower level, perhaps, the soul is purely biologically determined' yet on a higher level ‘the soul participates in objective values which cannot be deduced from the simple value of selfpreservation'.

To help appreciate Spranger's concepts, let me first turn to my passion for travel and pose a question: ‘Choose a specific city or destination for your next holiday, one you'll truly value. Have you got one?' Now imagine for a moment how many different responses I'm given when asking that question to hundreds of different people. And what if it were tens or hundreds of thousands of other readers? How many different answers might I get? A very limited list of answers would be: delving into dining and shopping; multifarious activities in Asian jungles; exploring sights of interest such as the fascinating history and captivating lights of Paris; pursuing a little flopand-drop solstice; a relaxed respite for a rundown soul via a sand, sea and sun-drenched break in the Bahamas, Maldives or Hawaii; overcoming challenges by climbing mountains; or rugging up for an extraordinary Antarctic rendezvous with seals or penguins. Yet amid the massive variety, we can begin to group destinations into geographical buckets such as continents, or into desires described by six themes: nature, adventure, museums, shopping, idle leisure and nightlife. The same is true when we consider intrinsic, internal motivation and drive. This is the essence of Spranger's work, which adds depth of wisdom to how people function via identifiable traits of surface personality types. He defined people's value attitudes as belonging to six primary categories. The ‘tour brochure' for these can be summarised as: 1. theoretical — dominantly interested in learning and the discovery of truth 2. economic (utilitarian) — interested in what is practical and useful 3. aesthetic — the highest value being form and harmony (think experiences) 4. social — the highest value being love of people and helping others 5. political — concerned with power, status or individually getting ahead 6. traditional — including religious, value unity and a system for living.

When you observe or ask questions of others you begin to see or hear which underlying intrinsic motivators or value systems are at play. In the same way that ‘Rome', ‘Venice', ‘Barcelona', ‘Tuscany' or even ‘the French countryside' and ‘the Swiss Alps' are all found in a European catalogue so a desire to ‘become an expert', ‘be an avid reader of general knowledge' or ‘become a scientific theorist' all fall within ‘The Theoretical Brochure'. A primary difference with how someone prefers to function, and their intrinsic motivation or why is one of fixedness. Someone preferring attention to detail may well dabble with big picture, variety or other preferences, as we've seen. That said, this modus operandi would generally remain a core, stable part of their operating system throughout life. Intrinsic motivation, our drive, has a greater tendency or inclination to periodically shift due to experiences and circumstances. My own desires as a young leader in his mid twenties travelling Europe were very different from those of the now five-decade-old professional with over 20 years' experience working in my field. When you listen to people's life stories you can hear these deviations in drivers. Using Spranger's model, successful people committed to the bottom line amassing wealth and fortune (economic) or even title (political) may experience a catastrophic illness or a crisis in communication with loved ones and suddenly the value system shifts more towards family or community (social) or enjoying more fully the fruits of life (aesthetic). Spranger's model, like the others, has continually adapted. His six primary motivators are dissected more deeply as 12 driving forces. Within them lie a mixture of our primary motivators, situational factors and less relevant forces at any moment in time. Once you learn to discover your truest intrinsic motivators, or those of people you wish to influence or collaborate with, you might consider tailoring rewards and recognition. Adapting any general language, positioning or context of key messages to appeal to individuals' driving force adds value. Simon Sinek, who sits among the highest viewed TED Talks, in discussing ‘how great leaders inspire action' highlights that they start with focusing on

the why. Think about it this way. Which goals are the ones you really get excited about? The ones people advise you should be chasing (extrinsic motivators like reward, recognition and punishment, which work fine) or the ones you self-discover and elect (intrinsic motivators like autonomy, mastery and purpose, which set the soul alight)? Motivation and finding your ‘flow' A final expert to highlight in conversations about desire and drive is one whose work I've appreciated for a long time. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi is a professor of psychology, sociology and anthropology who creatively dives into realms of happiness and motivation. Csikszentmihalyi is best known as the architect of the notion of ‘personal flow'. Essentially, ‘flow' is a focused mental state in which a person performs an activity, the individual being so fully immersed in the process it becomes fulfilling to the point of losing conscious track or awareness of time. With sport we might call this being ‘in the zone'. Csikszentmihalyi's ‘flow' theory offers a fresh variation by using a graph and labelling the x-axis as ‘Challenge' and the y-axis as ‘Skills'. Where the challenge set is very high while the skill set is low, the challenge may create nervousness, frustration and resistance. Performing such a challenge once in a while or over a short period may not be so detrimental, but doing so continually, without improvement to skills, is likely to cause anxiety. It's harder to get into the zone with unhealthy anxiety than optimistic nerves. Conversely, if the challenge set is very low while the skill set is high, you're more likely to become bored or complacent. Continuing in this manner over a period of time increases the risk of inducing apathy, which is also hardly conducive to being in the zone. Finding your flow and being in the zone isn't static given skill sets and challenges are always changing. Life isn't inert: we're always learning or facing new challenges. Every time you focus on a new task, your idea of what constitutes a challenge decreases. When a motivated individual finds their ‘flow', optimum performance occurs. They kind of forget themselves, they forget their problems and have a sense of doing what it is they are

doing. Nothing else matters. It creates a valuable feeling that life is worth living. Flow can happen anywhere: in our personal time, with family, at work or playing sport. In the same vein that we don't remain in a single state of flow for our entire lives, our overall motivation, or why, is just like those aspirational travel destinations. Sure, you may have a couple of long-standing favourites you have a tendency to visit regularly, but you will explore new territory. And so it is with the second layer of personal value, motivation — your why — especially internal motivation, which is a part of you and contributes to your perceptions of value. It also plays out and triggers part of your behaviour, how you may conduct yourself, the actions in what you do. Speaking of which … 3. Intelligence — IQ & EQ: your ability to do Working for Contiki Holidays was an eye-opener with regard to levels of human intelligence. I recall a colleague of mine who was leading a monthlong camping tour in the early 1990s. They were stunned and more than a little befuddled by one of their passengers. After erecting his allocated tent in Paris on the first night, he asked, in all seriousness, where might his dedicated tent phone plug-in be? After a fairly strange discussion the tourist remained miffed. What? The mobile accommodation for the duration of the trip, complete with portable tents, doesn't include some kind of portable telephone operating system to plug into each country's network grid? Intelligence, as with all aspects of human evolution, dates back to those same hunting, grunting early cave-dwelling ancestors. You can quite imagine that after the discovery of fire, a new short specific sound was added to the tribal vocabulary. A panicked exclamation designed to warn the tribes' cutest little grublets to be careful and not burn their hands or mouths. We know toddlers have a desire to discover their environment through sensory exploration, touching or tasting everything in sight no matter how

sharp, toxic or deadly. This grunt, passed on and translated for centuries, generation to generation, can still be heard with the same level of panic and sweat from parents the world over — the English specific translation being something along the lines of ‘Don't touch that! It's dangerous! It's hot!' Then of course the kid burns their hands or mouth anyway. Which curiously enough highlights a simple yet sizeable clue to intelligence: ultimately, words don't teach anywhere near the manner or depth that experience does. Early studies decoding intelligence It's only in moderately recent times — 19th century onwards — that we find dedicated, worthy studies to explain this significant phenomenon, namely intelligence, which apparently separates us from many other beasts. In the early 1900s the French passed a law requiring all children aged 6 to 14 to attend school. As part of due diligence it was decided to elicit insights to help determine which kids may require greater support or assistance in their studies. Alfred Binet, who invented the first IQ test, tested methodology involving questions and ideas not related to typical school curriculum content and published his research and findings in a paper, ‘Experimental Studies of Intelligence', in 1903. His research included themes like attention span, problem-solving skills, memory and retention. What he found surprising was how some junior children easily answered questions their seniors couldn't — or at least answered them more quickly than the adults. Medical student Theodore Simon helped Binet further explore and expand the documentation and its findings. In 1905 the Binet–Simon Scale became the first intelligence test, although Binet himself recognised that any ‘IQ' test was not valid as a single benchmark for ultimate overall intelligence. Binet was one of the first to identify the ability of chess-playing masters to navigate and win multiple games, simultaneously, even when playing from memory alone without visible access to the boards. Binet understood that some people are gifted with a marvellous mind for mnemonic memory yet are still not quite ‘intelligent' on what may be deemed a scale of normal.

Another interesting intellectual duo who've played a role in the advanced awareness of intelligence is Lancelot Ware (an Oxford postgraduate student who had administered tests as a researcher during World War II with an interest in a high IQ society for like-minded folks) and Roland Berrill (a rich, aristocratically minded, somewhat booming and colourful, extroverted Australian who had a similar interest in creating an aristocracy of the intellectual). Together, in 1946, they founded the ‘high IQ club' Mensa, one of the oldest societies intended as a club for bright minds and brainiacs. One aspect of Mensa that separates it from other exclusive, top end of town clubs is that membership can't be bought or bribed. Societal status, popularity, celebrity or money can't buy your way in. Membership is only granted to the top 2 per cent of gifted people. Even then applicants are assessed against a standardised, approved, supervised IQ test. The minimum score is 132, based on the following benchmark ranges for IQ scores: 130 plus: extremely high or very superior 120–129: very high or superior 110–119: high average 90–109: average 80–89: low average 70–79: very low or borderline 69 and below: extremely low. Berrill was apparently disappointed by how many Mensans, the cream of smart people, seemed to come from meagre or humble homes. This highlights another critical consideration about intelligence: any reliance on intellectual smarts alone — the closed or cold-minded manner with which some people act — doesn't equate to solid societal behavioural value. I think the guy asking about a portable phone exchange to plug into his tent as he travelled around Europe confused Contiki's age bracket of 18 to 35 with his IQ score — as did many others. The surprising truth about genius

We associate high IQ scores and the label ‘genius' with people like Albert Einstein (who never sat an IQ test, but it's estimated his was around 160), yet there are rumblings around a whole bunch of celebrities, too, who fall into this elite top percentile: Nicole Kidman, Jodie Foster, Arnold Schwarzenegger (and who would dare argue with him!), Natalie Portman, Steve Martin and Conan O'Brien among them. And I knew there was a reason — though I couldn't quite put my finger on why — I've always liked Kate Beckinsale beyond her character in Underworld. And Quentin Tarantino: I hear you're in the club too! ‘Genius' is one of those words I find ironic too. It's a term often associated with fields of extreme and intellectual — or ground-breaking — advancement in knowledge or creativity. Yet despite its association with scholarly and scientific pursuit, the precise definition — evidence-based, factual, rock-solid proof — of what makes someone undeniably so remains a little elusive. Applying Albert Einstein's definition of genius — ‘taking the complex and making it simple' — there's a tonne of people who can do that, yet you wouldn't trust them with a hairdryer close to a shower (or a telephone exchange in a tent). Alfred Binet correctly hypothesised that there are many factors at play when it comes to social intelligence. Some people with exceptionally high IQs have little to zero common sense or awareness of etiquette and they'll frequently be the most awkward people in the room. Mozart is said to have been one of these people. Conversely, there are street-smart folk who'd doubtless bomb out badly on any approved, supervised IQ test yet they radiate a light that everyone else will be enticed to swarm to like moths. This is why ‘EQ' (or ‘EI') has become popular in more recent years. It was professors Peter Salovey and John Mayer who first coined the label ‘emotional intelligence': the ability to be aware of and monitor one's own feelings and emotions in addition to those of others and to adjust one's thinking, choices and actions accordingly. Salovey and Mayer found that people scoring high on an emotional clarity scale (the aptitude to identify and name a broader range of feelings or

emotions) could recover more quickly from upsetting situations. Additionally, they found people endowed to more accurately read and appraise the emotional state of others were more adept, better equipped and more flexible within social environments, building connections or extending networks. All of which appeals to common sense and street credibility. Even if you have a deliciously ambiguous IQ score excluding you indefinitely from Mensa membership, you can still improve social intelligence. You can hit the pause button on life, be willing to listen and put a little thought into what's going on for yourself and others. Then reflect before leaping to action and deal with your world through default response, filters and preferences, a standard part of your operating system in how you function. EQ means electing a variety of more appropriate responses rather than onesize-fits-all. To improve one's EQ is to improve the quality of all outcomes and relationships. Daniel Goleman, a psychologist and former science writer for The New York Times is frequently associated with emotional intelligence. He's led a prolific dedication researching and writing multiple bestsellers on the subject. Goleman says ‘emotional intelligence begins to develop in the earliest years. All the small exchanges children have with their parents, teachers and with each other carry emotional messages'. Goleman's work, along with that of other thought leaders, in many ways takes a proverbial sledgehammer to paradigms or prior thinking that IQ alone indicates intelligence or uniquely measures such things as competency, capability, credibility or just plain old ability.

An EQ framework There are many variations or versions of EQ tools within the marketplace. Common categories for putting emotional intelligence in the spotlight fall under the following. 1. Self-awareness — recognising and understanding your emotional range, moods, triggers, auto responses and drives in addition to their impact on others. Someone high on the EQ scale may take a motto that sat above the ancient temples of Delphi to heart: ‘Know thyself'. 2. Self-regulation — the ability to control and redirect our impulses or moods, including the disruptive ones, appropriately; treating emotions as clues, like signposts, on a road map indicating the best path to take. This includes suspending judgement and leveraging the old adage of ‘think before acting' as sound instruction. 3. Motivation/drive — in the context of EQ, drive extends beyond intrinsic motivators such as knowledge and truth and relates to tenacity. It taps into passion or propensity to continue the pursuit of goals with persistence. 4. Social awareness — suspending all judgement and seeking to recognise and understand the emotional states and makeup of others. It's having awareness that everything you say or do has the power to impact, for better or worse, everyone around you. 5. Social regulation/skills — as the external culmination of EQ in action, this relates to the way we communicate with and treat others. It's having an ability to influence and offer perspective around the emotional clarity of others, and proficiently taking ownership of managing all relationships and networks. Looking at EQ through the filters of this framework there are patterns that emerge. Upon reflection you may even identify which may be your strengths, or conversely areas of opportunity to work on: intrapersonal pattern (self) — self-awareness + self-regulation

vs interpersonal pattern (others) — social awareness + social regulation and knowledge awareness pattern — self-awareness + social awareness vs regulation and action pattern—self-regulation + social regulation. How our emotions play out Our emotional states and moods, checked or unchecked, positive or negative, play a vital role in our conscious response choices, as opposed to auto reactions. They also have an impact on our own health and wellbeing as well as the quality of relationships in all aspects of our world. Negative emotional states tend to increase blood pressure and heart rate; create muscle tension and increase adrenaline and cortisol (a stress hormone); make our pupils dilate; and trigger cold, sweaty palms. In other words, the same hardwiring associated with a typical fight-or-flight response, even when not warranted. Positive emotional states have a tendency to improve immune function; decrease heart rate or blood pressure; improve clarity in decision-making, concentration or focus; relax the body; and ultimately allow us to be in a response state of thoughtful conscious choice rather than reaction: 1. we have ideas or thoughts about situations or things in our life 2. regardless of whether they are good or bad, these thoughts generate feelings (emotional states) 3. our feelings and emotional states determine and drive our actions 4. the actions we take create a reaction and deliver our results 5. the results may create a new belief or reinforce an existing one.

And so our emotional states and moods have the power to perpetuate cycles of behaviour and perceptions of value. Inspirational speaker and author Esther (Abraham) Hicks would say ‘a belief is an idea reinforced with emotion and feeling that you've held onto for a long time'. This is why a simple idea to improve overall EQ may be finding — authentically — things, people and situations that make you feel good. Take your attention away from the energy-sucking black holes. We all experience a vast range of feelings on a daily basis. Some can describe them in more detail than others. As Hermione Granger said to Ron Weasley in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, ‘Just because you've got the emotional range of a teaspoon doesn't mean we all have!' Negative emotions needn't necessarily be a bad thing. As the Dalai Lama points out, feelings are not destructive in themselves: they only become destructive when their intensity is out of proportion to the situation or when they arise in situations that do not warrant them. Think about it this way. You can be angry without acting out the anger. In fact there's potentially nothing more intimidating than someone in full control of their emotions very calmly stating, ‘You have no idea. How angry I am. Right now'. It tends to demand attention and respect way more than pots and pans flying across a room or fists flying through the air. Emotional expression directed as physical violence is merely one among a plethora of destructive intensities that are all too frequently way out of proportion when applied to situations. Blending layers of behaviour Earlier in the chapter I referenced that the behavioural layer of how we function has a tendency to remain a preferred consistent throughout life. Our preferences may lend themselves to specific skills or traits. We discussed that our why or intrinsic motivation changes according to circumstances, evolving personal growth or different stages of life. EQ has similarity with both. Some preferences on how to function, or indeed intrinsic drivers, may naturally lend themselves to different aspects

of EQ. Emotional intelligence is a skill that doesn't remain static. It can advance or regress. You can always keep improving through practical strategies consistently put into action. Where the energy goes, the traction flows. Our early ancestors showed signs of EQ: creating social bonds that led to the formation of small tribes who hunted collaboratively in packs, huddled together for warmth, and cared for the ill and elders. All of which was managed without traditional intelligence associated with IQ or even the sophistication of a common spoken tongue. Our overall intelligence (or perception of value) isn't exactly something we're critically born with. Like other animals, we may be super cute in infancy but we're really quite useless. Newborn elephants are among the most advanced. They're coerced so that they learn to stand within minutes of birth. They have to, otherwise they'd perish from not being able to drink their mother's milk. Baby dolphins are born with complex echolocation biosonar, which they rapidly begin experimenting with and expanding within days. We, on the other hand, lie for months in a cot, unable to do anything other than piss, fart, poo, burp, spit, drool and puke — often simultaneously. I tell you what, it's a damn good job we are super cute or our parents might be tempted to trade us in rather than nurturing and infusing us with value and love over long periods of time. Even once we're old enough to run around generally making a nuisance of ourselves, like baby elephants (who really are very cute), we're still rather daft. Other animals learn quickly to fend for themselves without quite so many f*ck ups. You won't hear a mummy elephant trumpeting the equivalent of our ancestors' grunts: ‘Don't touch that! It's hot!' Intelligence, especially the emotional kind, is something you can improve and develop over time. And it's worth it. The dark side of intelligence So, naturally, while on the topic of emotional intelligence, let's talk about psychopaths.

There are a few people among the general populous falling outside the spectrum of ‘normal'. In other words, somewhat incapacitated to develop their EQ potential. Psychopaths and sociopaths have a complete disregard for the safety, rights or concern of others. Manipulation, deceit or deliberate cunning are a part of their chosen personal weapons of choice. They don't have the capacity to feel remorse or guilt the way others do. Researchers debate, controversially at times, different aspects of both of these subsets. There are those working in the field who'd somewhat argue a case of genetic predisposition, a warrior gene that may be present in the case of psychopaths. Even then the environment — a lack of nurturing — unleashes the sleeping devil that hides inside. Sociopaths, on the other hand, are more frequently considered a creation of their environments. Either a lack of nurturing or extremities in life experiences twist a pure-born cherub into a demon. You can't see a sociopath in the rather useless but cute, wee bundle of joy in the cot. Psychopaths manage to hide and blend into society due to an ability to create a table of responses. That capacity, as evil as it is, shows signs of intelligence. They may not feel any emotion, yet they recognise something in how others react so they recreate or mimic it. Narcissists differ in that it's all about them. No, really. It is. Sociopaths and psychopaths may ask cunning questions or introduce topics of importance to you, to build an artificial trust. Making it about you may be a part of their path to power. Narcissists, on the other hand, introduce topics of interest about them. Passive-aggressive behaviours, such as silent treatment or severance, fall among the preferred weapons of choice in their vicious armoury of vanity. All are used to perpetuate a primary purpose fuelling admiration of their own self-worth and value, often at the expense of others. Studies have been shared suggesting a potentially higher ratio of psychopaths in senior C-suite roles than in other areas of the workplace. It was industrial psychologist Paul Babiak and criminal psychologist Robert D Hare who described this phenomenon of workplace psychopaths as ‘snakes

in suits', estimating that around 1 per cent of the general population (that's a freaking lot!) meets the clinical criteria for psychopathy. CEOs aren't alone in being tarred with the undesirable brush: lawyers, media personalities, sales people, police officers, clergy, journalists, surgeons and chefs all fall — according to the conclusions of Kevin Dutton, a British psychologist, in his ‘Great British Psychopath Survey' — among professions with the highest proportional rates. When you see Gordon Ramsay flying off the handle this may just have some merit. There has been an escalation of people dishing out labels of psychos, sociopaths or narcissists within their circle. The reality is that while the law of probability suggests we may well cross paths with individuals who would tick boxes for credible clinically diagnosed versions of each, we'd usually do so unknowingly. More commonly these slurs and slanders are a case of mistaken identity. We observe people demonstrating behaviours born from lower skills in specific facets of EQ — you know, crassly singing aloud songs telling anyone who doesn't love them to kiss their arse! Like Mozart is documented as doing! And it takes high EQ to suspend judgement. Not everyone who dishes out silent treatment is a narcissist. Social awkwardness or a lack of empathy are frequently tied to prior experiences that perhaps you're not aware of. Not everyone who shows an obvious disregard in valuing others is a psycho, sociopath or narcissist. They may be operating from a space of ego further magnified by a lack of EQ … I don't know why … I can't imagine … but for some strange reason a picture of Donald Trump springs to mind. Regardless, developing a higher EQ means continually working on yourself, simultaneously concerning yourself less in the judgement of others. Treat people as you wish to be treated. Well, unless of course you're a psychopath, in which case, for the record, I'm not suggesting for a moment you slice, dice and dish others around you, Hannibal Lecter style, with fava beans and a nice Chianti. Reflect on your world. Untangle the automatic emotional responses you may have learned along the way to date. Redirect disruptive impulses. Continue with persistence towards goals that excite and drive you, doing so